Classic British Flight Sim

even a 300 wouldn't be close to MTOW in full pax and fuel -- I asked one of the ex Polar dispatchers who works with me

10500 feet even at 40C wouldn't do that with a freighter at max structural let alone a passenger flight

WAT Joe, is Weight and Temperature - also known as density altitude here in the states thats why I mentioned that Dahka is at sea level -- heres the corollary

Virgin Atlantic operates a B747-400 from LAS-LGW daily -- usually with all the fuel they can pour into it plus a full boat of self loading tourists - McCarran is 2200 feet AMSL has an 11000 foot long runway
and temps get to +40 here routinely -- said 747 is always at 500 feet at the end of the runway....if you've been to Vegas you know how many large exotic resorts are in very close proximty to the end of 25R
They takeoff from here with approximatly the same flap setting - why do know this - because my son LOVES to go down to Sunset and sit and watch the "Ladybird" takeoff.....so if the aircraft in the video
had somekind of problem AFTER V1 he had no choice but to go ahead and fly if he had a power loss of somekind on an engine what you saw on the video was not someone showing off but someone doing
one hell of a good job of not becoming a large ball of aluminum and human beings.....I give the crew the benefit of the doubt....and before someone says -- why didnt they turn around and land -- there was a case recently of a British Airways 747 that departed LAX for LHR not so long ago and suffered an engine failure after takeoff....the crew continued on to London on three engines.


Leif

your right who needs 4 engines when the job can be done with three.
if O'leary gets his way we won't need two pilots anymore. Just one and a stewart , who in good conditions
maybe able to put one down safely, but throw in a couple of ac problems and weather conditions ...?
my point is if this is the norm; to push it instead of taking every precaution.
I ain't getting on. uh uh baby not me.


I go back to my question about instrumentation, and whether or not there was some indication that "everything wasn't up to snuff" before they
started to roll.


If it was a do or die situation then cudos to them.

your right who needs 4 engines when the job can be done with three.

Well if it's a choice between crashing in Dhaka and crashing somewhere else, I'd go somewhere else on three engines. Heck I'd go somewhere else on one...

airboatr wrote: I go back to my question about instrumentation, and whether or not there was some indication that "everything wasn't up to snuff" before they
started to roll.

Problem before v1 and it's "Stop, stop, stop". After v1 you take the problem into the air with you and then decide what you're going to do. Showboating is something you don't do on commercial operation and certainly not with a hot n heavy 74.

Could possibly be a performance calculation error i.e. perf data for that take off on the CFP run on forecast temp and actual temp turned out higher and no correction made, with possible wrong flex take off power as a result.

Lot of concern also at the moment after several incidents where wrong Take-Off Mass entered into FMS. Usually Zero Fuel Mass entered into Take-Off Mass box and this again gives wrong Take-off thrust setting.

Myriad of possibilities but impressing the anoraks...nah!

Looks like a case of tea and biccies with the Chief Pilot.

N

Sorry Nigel - the word sarcasm didnt stand out in neon lights did it?

probably a bit more that a chat with Chiefy -- probably a little remedial sim work I would think. plus some time on the beach.

That reminds me -- where did I put that Boys Big Book of ETOPS???




Leif

(back to school? at my age????)

ok I jumped the gun.

it happens

Looks like British Airways are at it too!
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... xiing.html

Ooops

Van Zanten

But, in spite of the captain's concerns, neither cross-checked the jet's location on the runway.

Help waits here:

http://www.hfsolutions.ch/cms/index.php

Cheers,

Nick